Gaylord Diocesan Watch recently reported on the director of the Marriage Tribunal, Dr. John Amos, being heavily involved in New Age philosophies condemned by the Church.  One of our members, Dr. Richard Brenz, sent a letter to the Diocese voicing his concerns.  Father Matthew Wigton, Vicar General of the Diocese, responded as follows:

August 20, 2019

Dear Dr. and Mrs. Brenz,

Bishop Raica thanks you for your recent letter in which you put forth your concerns regarding Dr. Amos.

Although trained in the enneagram, he makes no use of it in the Tribunal; his minimal use of it remains in the past.

With regard to the process of laicization, he properly followed all the procedures outlined by the Catholic Church for a change of his state of life.

Sincerely yours in Jesus and Mary,

 

Fr. Matthew Wigton

Vicar General

Dr. Brenz then sent a response to Fr. Matthew Wigton as follows:

Dear Fr. Wigton,

Thank you most sincerely for your recent reply to my inquiry re: Dr. Amos. Unfortunately, I’m rather dense when it comes to parsing the language of diocesan bureaucracy. Please thank the Bishop for his input, which you relayed to me. Please pass along to the Bishop that he is always welcome to contact me personally. Several questions come to mind which I hope you will generously address. I hope you will not find these inquiries unduly burdensome.

1) Does the Bp. condone the use of occultic New Age practices?  If Dr. Amos, as per your letter, makes no use of the enneagram in the tribunal, does he use it at home? Does he use it outside the tribunal?

2) What does “his minimal use of it remains in the past” mean? Is he no longer a practitioner? Why does he continue to promote himself as a trained instructor in the enneagram on his LinkedIn page?

3) Who hired Mr. Amos and wouldn’t his use of occultic practices in other areas of his life affect his judgment in issues faced by the tribunal? Has Mr. Amos undergone exorcism to remove any semblance of demonic influence from using the enneagram?

4) If a priest seeks laicization to pursue marriage, would this not represent a conflict of interest in the just and unbiased determination of nullity in the cases presented to the tribunal?

 

I hope these questions can be answered within your realm of expertise and competence as vicar general. I beg your indulgence in answering these inquiries as I’m not well-versed in this area. Thank you for your consideration in this matter.

 

Sincerely yours in Christ,

Richard Brenz M.D.